Monday, February 4, 2013

Today, we remain
perplexed about the phenomenon on display last night, and in most ACC
basketball games, where officials swallow their whistles late in the game and
let the players sort it out on the field/court.

The latter sentence should really say “let the players sort
it out on the field/court absent the rules.”

There are literally millions of fans today who will argue
whether or not Michael
Crabtree was held on a critical fourth down play in last night’s Super
Bowl. The video tape seems to shows Baltimore
cornerback Jimmy Smith draped all over Crabtree and, if one looks closely, you
will see Smith holding onto Crabtree’s jersey.
No penalty.

CBS’s Phil Simms noted that Crabtree was held beyond the
five-yard limit where this is legal and then, after a rather discomforting
silence, followed up with “it was a good no call.” Mike
Pereira, the former NFL vice president of officiating tweeted: "Tough play
that is really close both ways. Good job not calling anything,"

We ask a simply question: WTF?

Smith is holding Crabtree. Crabtree is pushing back trying
to get away because Smith is holding his jersey. It wasn’t a close play, but
Perieira and Simms are buying into the conventional wisdom that players decide
games late not the officials. That seems to infer not so subtly that it’s best
to “let them play” outside the rules that are enforced the rest of the time.

(Ezra Shaw/Getty Images)

While we had no team of choice in this game or a wager (cash or friendly) on the outcome, as a football fan of almost 50 years, we can't help but point out that this makes NO SENSE whatsoever.

Evidently, this is the conventional wisdom and accepted
practice after years of brainwashing sports fans that this is the best way. You
know, like the NRA saying, and we're paraphrasing here: “if you take my bazooka, someday you will take my
hunting rifle.” They have said is so much for so long, a large portion of their
constituents believes it no matter how illogical it may be? Has the late game "no call" achieved such
acceptance regardless of it's merit?

By the way, if not held, we don’t think Crabtree could have
caught the ball in bounds, but what is the point of the rule if you only call
it some of the time? Of course, some loyal readers will say “there are uncalled
penalties on every play,” and this is true. Many of those penalties are part of
the chaos of every play, but infractions that involve the point of the action
(a late hit on a quarterback, a facemask on a runner or interference or holding
on the intended receiver) should not be missed or go uncalled because it will
impact the “outcome of the game.” The
point of enforcing the rules is to keep those who break the rules from impacting
the “outcome of the game.”

Do you think Jimmy Smith didn't know that Crabtree catching
the go ahead touchdown would impact the “outcome of the game?” We aren't suggesting he did it on purpose, but he did it trying to stop his opponent from
winning the game. Problem was (or, at least, should have been) that his actions
are against the rules and a penalty should have been called.

So, with that as context, let’s look at the ever popular “no
call” as it relates to the NFL in the vacuum with only common sense as the
measuring stick (and this is true for the ACC to a much lesser extent, but sill
applicable.)

The NFL is based on rules. They have
rules about what players wear, say and do.
They enforce those rules with such gusto that sometimes their rulings
are deemed punitive or subject to much commentary and, at times, legal action. They rejoice in their rules and in the
enforcement of same. Until they don’t.

(Mike Ehrmann/Getty Images)

Yet in the final minutes of games, the NFL’s guardians of
the rules down on the field decide not to enforce the rules contrary to the
position taken the other 98% of the time.
Oddly enough, people are OK with this.

Imagine a PGA golfer improving his lie before a critical
shot on the final hole of a playoff of the U.S. Open while his opponents and the
tournament officials looked the other way (on purpose!). People would go nuts, and rightfully so. But apparently one can hold a receiver on
fourth down late in a Super Bowl, and that is “part of the game.”

Our point is it shouldn't be.

Basically, the “no call” says it’s acceptable to not enforce
the rules at a particular moment. How many times have you heard athletes, analysts,
commentators and fans say “just be consistent.” If the ump is calling the high
strike call it all game, and everybody is happy. Yet, that mentality goes out the window the last two minutes of football
and basketball games.

We don’t get that.

Why does a play that draws flag or a foul on the opening play, not draw the flag or foul on the last play? How is that "consistent?"

Now, you may shrug that off and say “well, that’s the
culture of the NFL, let the players settle it” and there is “discretion”
involved in the enforcement of all the rules that apply to an organized
society. We get that, but we still think
the three blind mice approach to the end of sporting events is just plain loco.

If we endorse the “no call,” why not change the rules and
let the players “determine the outcome” outside the rules the entire game? What sense does it make to allow players to
cheat during an end game situation when the outcome is on the line while
requiring them to play within the rules the rest of the game when the outcome
is still on the line but not imminent?

Why not change the rules to make various plays illegal “except
in the last two minutes or any other time deemed crucial by the game officials?” That sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? But that is exactly what is happening now.

For some reason, the “conventional wisdom” is that it is
wrong for an official’s call to determine the outcome of the game. That said, it is therefore OK to cheat in the
final minutes to determine the outcome of the game. There is no other way to look at it if you
are being really honest about what is currently happening.

(Christian Petersen/Getty Images)

The same situation occurs in many ACC basketball games in the
final minutes and advocates of the status quo offer up the same illogical
reason for support. “That’s the way it’s
always been” doesn’t seem to hold up when you apply some simple logic to this
bizarre contradiction – we have rules, you must follow the rules except when you
don’t have to follow the rules.

Fact is, the players know this so by not having the “officials
decide the game” in the final minutes of close contests because a player broke
the rules, they let the players willing to break the rules have the greatest advantage
and influence on the outcome because we don’t want the rules to “determine the
outcome.”

Huh?

Like it or not that is exactly what is happening.

Then the NFL fines anybody who questions this hypocrisy, because…that’s
a rule and the NFL enforces their rules. Sometimes.

So when we sit around and complain about the fall of
civilization as we know it, let’s keep in mind the phenomenon of “the rules are
to be enforced until we decide not to enforce them.”

WHERE IN THE WORLD...?

The way it is...

The way it was...

TAH DAMN GOOD CAUSE OF THE MONTH

NORTHERN HAITI HOPE FOUNDATION: After our recent trip to Haiti, we vowed to do more to help. Clean water is a critical issue for all Haitians. It's particularly problematic for those in rural areas. For $2,000 to $5,000 we can build a new well in a rural village as part of a program facilitated by the St. Barthelemy School and the Warrenton, VA Rotary. Send your donation to Wells of Health and Hope, c/o GPetty-VTA, 38 Garrett Street, Warrenton, VA 20186 and keep your eye on T.A.H. for progress reports. Thanks! CLICK ON THE PHOTO FOR MORE INFO.